SolidSnake wrote:Id like to hear from the Bylsma supporters what does Bylsma do that makes him such a great coach?

I'm not sure about "great" coach and while I, too, am souring on him as Jacques Martin doesn't appear to be able to get enough of his influence involved here, I will say this about Bylsma...he is a real pace-pusher, more than a lot of coaches in the NHL, he gets his talent out ahead of the play and feels that the key to creating organic offense is let the skill win the one-on-one battles without having to deal with such oppressive back pressure. He has tried to create room for his skill in a league where the game is too fast for its own good.

Another point, while we currently rate "players' coach" as a negative (which I'm not saying is right or wrong), it is very difficult to keep lots of talent happy and at least relatively engaged. That is not easy. That's a lot harder than people give it credit for. It's like the people that say, "bleh, what did Glen Sather do? I could have coached those 80's Oilers to a few Cups myself..." No, you most certainly could not have. I've never coached in the NHL, but I know what it's like to have "star" players (relative to the competition) and "star personalities" on the bench and honestly, there's a couple battles I've lost and as a result "lost" the star player, so to speak. Flip side, Sidney Crosby has been consummate professional since he was 15 years old, he's not really the Yashin-type or anything...so full points may not need to be awarded, but how do you challenge Sidney Crosby? How do you get him to believe what you're saying?

Parallel to football, how do you coach Peyton Manning? How do you call plays as an offensive coordinator for Peyton Manning? The line becomes blurred as to who is coaching whom when you're dealing with the smartest player in the league...Crosby, isn't quite as vocal as Manning is, but the point remains.

He's a good "situation" matcher, as oppose to a line matcher. You see these fanatical line matchers like Claude Julien and Randy Carlyle and it has value, sure. You feel like you have a purpose when you're Gregory Campbell or Jay McClement...but sometimes it comes at a price. Sometimes Phil Kessel can't get out there as often as you'd like, sometimes Patrice Bergeron is too involved in his checking duties to really show off his offensive skills...if it's over-used and over-thought, it negatively affects your bench...you get these talented players sitting there, they're ready to go, and then you tap checkers for the second time in three shifts and there's a sag, there's some frustration...and I'm not talking about the first time or whatever, but sometimes over the course of a season or over the course of a series, that gets to you. Your skill players get frustrated, like they're taking a backseat...on the rink, they call no man "mister" and now all of a sudden Jay McClement is logging 3 or 4 more minutes, 4 or 5 more shifts than your star Phil Kessel (http://www.hockey-reference.com/boxscor ... 10BOS.html). Bylsma does a good job with man management, time management and situational matching. Knowing who can drag the team out of the gutter with regularity (Staal, Sutter) and who provides the most danger for the opposition with a head start (Malkin/Neal)...

I'm not a Bylsma apologist or anything of the sort (far from it), I think I have a good idea of when we're out-coached and I've gone over it a thousand times, but you asked twice, so that's what an outsider (to the Pens day-to-day operations) picks up...

SolidSnake wrote:Id like to hear from the Bylsma supporters what does Bylsma do that makes him such a great coach?

I'm not sure about "great" coach and while I, too, am souring on him as Jacques Martin doesn't appear to be able to get enough of his influence involved here, I will say this about Bylsma...he is a real pace-pusher, more than a lot of coaches in the NHL, he gets his talent out ahead of the play and feels that the key to creating organic offense is let the skill win the one-on-one battles without having to deal with such oppressive back pressure. He has tried to create room for his skill in a league where the game is too fast for its own good.

Another point, while we currently rate "players' coach" as a negative (which I'm not saying is right or wrong), it is very difficult to keep lots of talent happy and at least relatively engaged. That is not easy. That's a lot harder than people give it credit for. It's like the people that say, "bleh, what did Glen Sather do? I could have coached those 80's Oilers to a few Cups myself..." No, you most certainly could not have. I've never coached in the NHL, but I know what it's like to have "star" players (relative to the competition) and "star personalities" on the bench and honestly, there's a couple battles I've lost and as a result "lost" the star player, so to speak. Flip side, Sidney Crosby has been consummate professional since he was 15 years old, he's not really the Yashin-type or anything...so full points may not need to be awarded, but how do you challenge Sidney Crosby? How do you get him to believe what you're saying?

Parallel to football, how do you coach Peyton Manning? How do you call plays as an offensive coordinator for Peyton Manning? The line becomes blurred as to who is coaching whom when you're dealing with the smartest player in the league...Crosby, isn't quite as vocal as Manning is, but the point remains.

He's a good "situation" matcher, as oppose to a line matcher. You see these fanatical line matchers like Claude Julien and Randy Carlyle and it has value, sure. You feel like you have a purpose when you're Gregory Campbell or Jay McClement...but sometimes it comes at a price. Sometimes Phil Kessel can't get out there as often as you'd like, sometimes Patrice Bergeron is too involved in his checking duties to really show off his offensive skills...if it's over-used and over-thought, it negatively affects your bench...you get these talented players sitting there, they're ready to go, and then you tap checkers for the second time in three shifts and there's a sag, there's some frustration...and I'm not talking about the first time or whatever, but sometimes over the course of a season or over the course of a series, that gets to you. Your skill players get frustrated, like they're taking a backseat...on the rink, they call no man "mister" and now all of a sudden Jay McClement is logging 3 or 4 more minutes, 4 or 5 more shifts than your star Phil Kessel (http://www.hockey-reference.com/boxscor ... 10BOS.html). Bylsma does a good job with man management, time management and situational matching. Knowing who can drag the team out of the gutter with regularity (Staal, Sutter) and who provides the most danger for the opposition with a head start (Malkin/Neal)...

I'm not a Bylsma apologist or anything of the sort (far from it), I think I have a good idea of when we're out-coached and I've gone over it a thousand times, but you asked twice, so that's what an outsider (to the Pens day-to-day operations) picks up...

Im pretty sure you dont coach manning. You teach the rest of the offense his offense. pop

I like him, I think he is a good coach, but not great (because, as I look around the league, there may only be 2 or 3 legitimately "great" coaches). Do I think he could be better? Of course. He's only been in coaching at the NHL level for 5 years. He still has a lot of learning to do, which I believe is part of why Shero brought in Jacques Martin. The defensive side of the Pens' game has been night and day between this year and the last few. Could he maybe do a few things differently? Sure, but find me a coach anywhere who does not have any faults. And before you say it: no, I am not using that as an excuse for him.

I don't think everything is 100% his fault 100% of the time (as the majority of his detractors want the board to believe). I don't see why that makes me "indifferent". That is where I believe my opinion differs. I don't place 100% of the blame on him 100% of the time.

Ok again fair enough. People think i am difficult. What is it that you want out of the team then? I want them to win the cup and hopefully be entertaining while doing so. Any time you wan to actually answer a question rather than continuing off on a tangent would be great...or just let me know to drop the conversation.

Are all of the Pens faults and failures over the years his fault? No. Is he a terrible coach? No.

To me, he's a very average coach who has stepped into a dream situation. I think he's pretty good at the pregame stuff. The Pens typically come ready to play and have fast starts. He's also pretty solid at getting a lot out of guys that don't have much talent.

I could mention all the things that are constantly talked about when it comes to his shortcomings. But my biggest problem with him is the attitude this team has taken under him. When Torts said the Pens were, "One of the most arrogant organizations in hockey." we all made fun of him. When in reality, he was very correct. The Pens are incredibly arrogant. They have gone from a team that always worked their butt off, took accountability, and let their game do their talking, to a team that is always making excuses, a team that folds under pressure, a team that can't adjust when things don't go their way, a team that acts like little kids when they are challenged, and worst of all a team that has become very predictable. The book is out on the Pens. Everyone knows how to beat them. And the complete refusal of Dan Bylsma to change the way he coaches the team is just too much for me.

The Pens have had more talent than any other more than once since Bylsma has been coach. The talent is just plain unfair sometimes. And what have they gotten out of it? One Cup. That's not good enough. Not even close.

I see this organization following the same path as it did in the 90's. The Pens wasted so much talent in that decade after the two Cups because they became entitled and lazy. So many similarities between then and now. The Pens have had 4 straight playoff failures with him. And nothing has changed. He should have been fired after the Philly series, which was the biggest embarrassment in franchise history. But Bylsma gets the wins in the regular season and the sellouts continue. And for the first time I am really starting to wonder if the Pens number one goal is to win. Or if getting those sellouts and a bunch of NBC games is enough now.

Bottom line is, I think the Pens attitude and direction mostly stinks right now and Bylsma's message has become stale. And I have zero confidence in a Bylsma led Pens team when the playoffs role around.

Idoit40fans wrote:Anyone that thinks this team can accept 3 straight early exits then the worst conference finals elimination in history and still argue that the coach should say is suggesting that he's great, yes.

This, exactly. So I guess some people are satisfied with an average coach then right?

farnham16 wrote:And for the first time I am really starting to wonder if the Pens number one goal is to win. Or if getting those sellouts and a bunch of NBC games is enough now.

Bottom line is, I think the Pens attitude and direction mostly stinks right now and Bylsma's message has become stale. And I have zero confidence in a Bylsma led Pens team when the playoffs role around.

I don't expect a Cup every year, and I think it's unfair to the coach as well as the players to expect such. As I have pointed out in the past, the teams with Lemieux, Jagr, Stevens, Murphy, Barrasso et al. only won 2 Cups in an era where it was much easier to keep the same team and same players from year to year and win the Cup year after year (see: Edmonton Oilers, Dallas Stars, New Jersey Devils, Detroit Red Wings). Last year was the first time since the lockout that 4 previous winners made it to the conference finals. The amount of parity in this league is insane.

I don't even really set expectations, because I've noticed that when I do, it's hard to take when they aren't reached. I understand why you guys get angry, because I used to be the same way until I realized it wasn't really that healthy for me. I hate feeling like crap over something I can't control. That is why I like to keep my sports watching separate from everything else. I just enjoy watching this sport. I want the team to do well, because it's a hell of a lot better winning than losing. I hope they win the Cup, but I'm not going to bank on it every year. I know I want them to at least make the playoffs (which shouldn't be too much of a problem).

I guess the main thing is, I'll support the team and hope they do well regardless of who is on it, who is coaching, how the team is playing, etc. etc. I've supported the team through the bad stuff. I know that how the team has been playing lately is nothing compared to watching a team full of barely AHL-level players attempt to play at the NHL level.

I don't know. I guess I'm just not that expressive in my disappointment. That doesn't mean that I don't get disappointed.

tl;dr I want the team to win, but I don't expect a Cup every year. I don't see how that makes me "indifferent".

The Pens haven't even come close to winning a Cup since 09. With the incredible talent they have had since and the ways they have lost, I'll never understand how anyone can just shake it off as, "oh well, can't win the Cup every year."

I move on from their losses when the last second ticks off the clock, but im not content with them running with something that obviously doesnt work. Oh well, cant give yourself a chance to win every year.

it's a really silly argument for November. The Pens aren't going to change their coach now. They're not going to change their coach during the regular season unless it it evident they may miss the playoffs unless a major change happens, as in 2009. Despite some of the naysayers, we aren't at that point, and frankly won't be under Bylsma. One think you can't criticism him for is poor regular season performance. So this conversation should really be shelved until the off season, at the earliest.